Perceived risk of HIV transmission by blood transfusion among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) in Australia

Should men who have ever had sex with men be allowed to donate blood in Brazil?

Many countries have modified their policies on banning or deferring blood donation by men who have sex with men (MSM) in light of ethical concerns and new evidence about transfusion risks. In Brazil, MSM were not eligible to donate blood unless they had been celibate for the previous 12 months. However, in May 2020, the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court overturned this restriction. Many authors have attempted to stress possible risks of transfusion-transmitted infection under various scenarios of changes in bans or restrictions on donations by MSM using mathematical models, but we consider that it is a difficult task due to the wide variety of sexual behaviors, attitudes, and practices. Among these factors, we highlight sex under the influence of illicit drugs, and the fact that people with an undetectable human immunodeficiency virus viral load have the potential to transmit should their blood be transfused. Despite these possible risks, we believe that some MSM can donate blood regardless of the time elapsed since their last sexual contact, especially because blood donations by MSM were occurring even when there were time-based deferral rules. Blood banks should always seek to use screening algorithms to identify high-risk sexual behaviors using gender-neutral criteria, and education about transfusion risks should be offered to healthcare workers and MSM.

Acceptability of sexual history questions in a gender-neutral risk assessment for blood donation

BACKGROUND

Currently in Australia, men are deferred from donating blood if they have had sex with another man within the past 3  months. However, a proposed gender-neutral assessment (GNA) process will ask all donors questions about sex with new or multiple recent partners, with deferral based on responses to a question about anal sex. Understanding the acceptability of such questions among existing and potential blood donors is paramount for successful implementation of GNA.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We used data from a nationally representative survey to estimate the levels of comfort with the proposed GNA questions among the Australian population and subgroups, defined by self-reported ethnicity and religion. Respondents were aged over 18 and living in Australia. Results were weighted to represent the population.

RESULTS

Most of the 5178 respondents described themselves as comfortable with answering questions about new partners (73.1%) or anal sex (64.0%) to donate blood. However, 2.2% and 4.5% indicated that questions about new sex partners and anal sex, respectively, would stop them from donating, and 4.4% and 7.7% respectively, said they were "completely uncomfortable." By religion, the least comfortable were Muslim or Eastern Orthodox respondents, and by country of birth, the least comfortable were those born in the Middle East, followed by those born in Southern Europe and Asia.

DISCUSSION

GNA appears to be broadly acceptable in the Australian context, but our findings suggest that key GNA questions are less acceptable in some population subgroups, indicating a need for targeted campaigns that consider cultural sensitivities.

The impact of blood donation deferral strategies on the eligibility of men who have sex with men and other sexual risk behavior in Australia

BACKGROUND

In Australia, a man cannot donate blood if he has had sex with another man within the past 3 months. However, this policy has been criticized as being discriminatory as it does not consider lower risk subgroups, and led to calls for modifications to the policy that more accurately distinguish risk among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM).

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We used data from a nationally representative survey to estimate the proportion of GBM aged 18-74 years old who would be eligible to donate under current criteria and other scenarios.

RESULTS

Among the 5178 survey participants, 155 (3.0%) were classified as GBM based on survey responses, Among the GBM, 40.2% (95% CI 28.0%-53.7%) were eligible to donate based on current criteria, and 21.0% (95% CI 14.5%-29.5%) were ineligible due to the 3 months deferral alone. Eligibility among GBM, all men, and the population increased as criteria were removed. Under the new Australian plasma donation criteria, 73.6% (95% CI 64.4%-81.1%) of GBM, 68.4% (95% CI 65.5%-71.2%) of all men, and 60.8% (95% CI 58.8%-62.8%) of the full population were estimated to be eligible. Only 16.1% (95% CI 8.6%-28.1%) of GBM knew that the male-to-male sex deferral period is 3 months.

DISCUSSION

Changing the deferral criteria and sexual risk evaluation would lead to a higher proportion of GBM being eligible to donate blood. Knowledge of the current GBM deferral period is very low. Improved education about the current criteria and any future changes are required to improve blood donation rates.